1263 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17652282)
1. Additional double reading of screening mammograms by radiologic technologists: impact on screening performance parameters.
Duijm LE; Groenewoud JH; Fracheboud J; de Koning HJ
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2007 Aug; 99(15):1162-70. PubMed ID: 17652282
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Introduction of additional double reading of mammograms by radiographers: effects on a biennial screening programme outcome.
Duijm LE; Groenewoud JH; Fracheboud J; van Ineveld BM; Roumen RM; de Koning HJ
Eur J Cancer; 2008 Jun; 44(9):1223-8. PubMed ID: 18400488
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Blinded double reading yields a higher programme sensitivity than non-blinded double reading at digital screening mammography: a prospected population based study in the south of The Netherlands.
Klompenhouwer EG; Voogd AC; den Heeten GJ; Strobbe LJ; de Haan AF; Wauters CA; Broeders MJ; Duijm LE
Eur J Cancer; 2015 Feb; 51(3):391-9. PubMed ID: 25573788
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Additional Breast Cancer Detection at Digital Screening Mammography through Quality Assurance Sessions between Technologists and Radiologists.
Coolen AMP; Korte B; Tjan-Heijnen VCG; Bodewes HW; Voogd AC; Duijm LEM
Radiology; 2020 Mar; 294(3):509-517. PubMed ID: 31909697
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Inter-observer variability in mammography screening and effect of type and number of readers on screening outcome.
Duijm LE; Louwman MW; Groenewoud JH; van de Poll-Franse LV; Fracheboud J; Coebergh JW
Br J Cancer; 2009 Mar; 100(6):901-7. PubMed ID: 19259088
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Medical radiologic technologist review: effects on a population-based breast cancer screening program.
Tonita JM; Hillis JP; Lim CH
Radiology; 1999 May; 211(2):529-33. PubMed ID: 10228538
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Do mammographic technologists affect radiologists' diagnostic mammography interpretative performance?
Henderson LM; Benefield T; Bowling JM; Durham DD; Marsh MW; Schroeder BF; Yankaskas BC
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2015 Apr; 204(4):903-8. PubMed ID: 25794085
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Arbitration of discrepant BI-RADS 0 recalls by a third reader at screening mammography lowers recall rate but not the cancer detection rate and sensitivity at blinded and non-blinded double reading.
Klompenhouwer EG; Weber RJ; Voogd AC; den Heeten GJ; Strobbe LJ; Broeders MJ; Tjan-Heijnen VC; Duijm LE
Breast; 2015 Oct; 24(5):601-7. PubMed ID: 26117723
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The influence of mammographic technologists on radiologists' ability to interpret screening mammograms in community practice.
Henderson LM; Benefield T; Marsh MW; Schroeder BF; Durham DD; Yankaskas BC; Bowling JM
Acad Radiol; 2015 Mar; 22(3):278-89. PubMed ID: 25435185
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Can computer-aided detection with double reading of screening mammograms help decrease the false-negative rate? Initial experience.
Destounis SV; DiNitto P; Logan-Young W; Bonaccio E; Zuley ML; Willison KM
Radiology; 2004 Aug; 232(2):578-84. PubMed ID: 15229350
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Effect of recall rate on earlier screen detection of breast cancers based on the Dutch performance indicators.
Otten JD; Karssemeijer N; Hendriks JH; Groenewoud JH; Fracheboud J; Verbeek AL; de Koning HJ; Holland R
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2005 May; 97(10):748-54. PubMed ID: 15900044
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Added Value of Prereading Screening Mammograms for Breast Cancer by Radiologic Technologists on Early Screening Outcomes.
Geertse TD; Setz-Pels W; van der Waal D; Nederend J; Korte B; Tetteroo E; Pijnappel RM; Broeders MJM; Duijm LEM
Radiology; 2022 Feb; 302(2):276-283. PubMed ID: 34751612
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Incorporation of the technologist's opinion for arbitration of discrepant assessments among radiologists at screening mammography.
Coolen AMP; Lameijer JRC; Voogd AC; Strobbe LJ; Louwman MWJ; Tjan-Heijnen VCG; Duijm LEM
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2018 Aug; 171(1):143-149. PubMed ID: 29730729
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Breast screening using 2D-mammography or integrating digital breast tomosynthesis (3D-mammography) for single-reading or double-reading--evidence to guide future screening strategies.
Houssami N; Macaskill P; Bernardi D; Caumo F; Pellegrini M; Brunelli S; Tuttobene P; Bricolo P; Fantò C; Valentini M; Ciatto S
Eur J Cancer; 2014 Jul; 50(10):1799-1807. PubMed ID: 24746887
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Independent double reading of screening mammograms in The Netherlands: effect of arbitration following reader disagreements.
Duijm LE; Groenewoud JH; Hendriks JH; de Koning HJ
Radiology; 2004 May; 231(2):564-70. PubMed ID: 15044742
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Effect of computer-aided detection on independent double reading of paired screen-film and full-field digital screening mammograms.
Skaane P; Kshirsagar A; Stapleton S; Young K; Castellino RA
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2007 Feb; 188(2):377-84. PubMed ID: 17242245
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Detection of bilateral breast cancer at biennial screening mammography in the Netherlands: a population-based study.
Setz-Pels W; Duijm LE; Groenewoud JH; Voogd AC; Jansen FH; Hooijen MJ; Louwman MW
Radiology; 2011 Aug; 260(2):357-63. PubMed ID: 21474705
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Variations in screening outcome among pairs of screening radiologists at non-blinded double reading of screening mammograms: a population-based study.
Klompenhouwer EG; Duijm LE; Voogd AC; den Heeten GJ; Nederend J; Jansen FH; Broeders MJ
Eur Radiol; 2014 May; 24(5):1097-104. PubMed ID: 24500086
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The inter-observer variability of breast density scoring between mammography technologists and breast radiologists and its effect on the rate of adjuvant ultrasound.
Mazor RD; Savir A; Gheorghiu D; Weinstein Y; Abadi-Korek I; Shabshin N
Eur J Radiol; 2016 May; 85(5):957-62. PubMed ID: 27130056
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Independent double reading of screening mammograms.
Ciatto S; Del Turco MR; Morrone D; Catarzi S; Ambrogetti D; Cariddi A; Zappa M
J Med Screen; 1995; 2(2):99-101. PubMed ID: 7497164
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
